AIBU to think my ex should pay more child maintenance when he earns £720k a year?

[Pashpash24]

I’ll try to keep this as short as possible while giving some back story.

I was with my ex-partner for four years. We had a son together, but he walked out before he was born. He saw him a few times as a newborn, but I had asked that he didn’t bring his new partner. My son was six weeks old when he turned up at my door with her, even though I’d said it was too soon.

He took me to court saying she should be allowed to meet him. The court agreed it was too soon and suggested maybe when the baby was older.

Because of that, he told me he would never see his son again. I was devastated and said fine, she can meet him, because I didn’t want him to walk away. But he still refused and never saw him again.

For six years, he had no contact — no visits, no messages, nothing. The only thing he did was pay child maintenance. It was a decent amount (£1,277.50 a month), and I never asked for more.

He went on to have three more children with his now wife. I just got on with life until one day my son came out of school and asked, “I must have a dad, right?” I’d never told him about his father because I didn’t want him to feel abandoned.

When he started asking more questions, I texted his dad to say I was going to tell him the truth — I wasn’t going to raise him on a lie. I’d messaged over the years, even sent photos, and he’d read them on WhatsApp but never replied. So I didn’t expect a response this time either.

Surprisingly, he replied and said maybe it was time to meet. This was when my son was six (he’s now nearly nine). In the last three years, he’s probably met him in person about 10 times. He calls roughly once every 10 days, which I think is poor — it should’ve progressed a lot more by now.

Anyway, to the point. I recently logged into my Child Maintenance account after receiving an unusual notification. It showed his salary: £720,000 a year.

I’ve always been paid £1,277.50 a month because that’s what CMS caps it at. He could earn £1 million a week and I’d still receive that same amount — you have to go to court for any increase.

Would he be able to afford more? Absolutely. I know it’s a decent amount, but he only pays it because that’s the legal minimum CMS tells him to.

I’m self-employed and work part-time so my son can do after-school activities — he’s football mad and trains/plays four times a week. I’m essentially raising him alone; my dad moved 40 miles away, and I have no relationship with my mum. I rarely get a break, but that’s been the reality since the start.

I’ve never asked for an increase, but life is much more expensive now. £1,277 doesn’t go as far as it did six years ago, and £720,000 a year is a huge income.

To put it into perspective — CMS only calculates maintenance on a maximum salary of £156,000 a year. My ex earns over four times that, but I still only get the amount they’d set for £156k — just over 2% of his actual income. Unless I go to court for a “top-up order”, that’s all I’ll ever get.

AIBU to ask for more?

I think its because they've been indoctrinated for years to believe the mysogonist ideas

OP was with the man for four years and he walked out when she was pregnant, yet somehow you’re making her out to be some opportunist.

Perhaps some degree of opportunism. More likely just trying to force something. People generally don't have serious relationships for 4yrs and not make any steps to at least move in together. He certainly didn't see her as serious. Because he's shown his actions when he is. His wife, he had met, married and had 3 children in not much more that the same space of time than OP states their relationship was.

If you asked him, was it a 4yr relationship, or was OP someone he was casually dating on and off perhaps amongst others over a few years. I think it's clear that he was what OP wanted, and I think she built up visions of one day a proper relationship, moving in, a family, because they were sleeping together. I think we've all been guilty of convincing ourselves of things are fine and real when we don't want the alternative to be true.

He didn't walk out on anything because there wasn't anything to walk out on. Had she made the same decision as him and decided the baby wasn't wanted, it would be a total non event. Two people that don't live together, no longer sleeping together. No division of assets. No unmerging of families. No moving out and starting again. Just a boyfriend ending it with his girlfriend.

All those things remain the same, except OP found she was pregnant. There seems to be some weird expectation that he should suddenly want her child and raise it and he's a "shit" for not wanting either. If she's decided the same, is she a "shit?" No. Does he pay the maximum amount CMS can grant, every month, without fail? Yes. Funding her ability to choose to work part time. Yes.

After seeing the reality of deciding to have a child that only one parent wants, and having played silly buggers with contact when he was born because she was jealous of his wife, her son starts asking for his dad, so she contacts him, and fair play he agrees to some contact. And after all this, she's clocked her ex's pay packet some ten years after the last time she was anything to do with him. And her great idea is to go after him for even more cash.

So a woman goes ahead and decides to have the baby

a man has sex and expects a woman not to get pregnant or get presents and then abort the baby when he decides to leave the relationship

After seeing the reality of deciding to have a child that only one parent wants, and having played silly buggers with contact when he was born because she was jealous of his wife, her son starts asking for his dad, so she contacts him, and fair play he agrees to some contact. And after all this, she's clocked her ex's pay packet some ten years after the last time she was anything to do with him. And her great idea is to go after him for even more cash

It's the fact you don't understand human feelings of a visitor being brought into the house that is the girlfriend of your ex - I can't get my head round how callous and uncaring you come across. I hope I never meet you in real life

Christ, how to keep a woman in her place 101!! You think he’s doing his son and OP a favour by seeing him son every ten days, taking him to an arcade occasionally and never having him overnight and you’re essentially telling OP to be happy with the status quo because if she rocks the boat he’ll go NC.

You talk about an emotional about turn when DS was six as though it was some cuddly heart warming event. It wasn’t. He was involved with the child until the point where OP refused to let his GF visit the baby, so he dragged her through the courts to try to force her hand. And when the courts agreed that it was too soon and should wait until the child was older, he went NC for the next six years.

That the maintenance is paid via CMS speaks volumes about his willingness to pay - OP likely had no choice but to pursue him this way. It may be a high amount but it represents the most he has to pay under CMS and when you equate £1200 a month with his earnings of £33,000 a month you see the inequity. Not exactly dad of the year.

What a strange thing to say.

Nowhere on the thread does it say that he expected her to terminate the baby.

She gets to choose if she has it. He gets to choose to have any involvement.

What you don't get to do is know the other person doesn't want the child, have it, then berate them for being absent because you couldn't force them to raise said child with you. Nor play the "poor me and my poor child" card because, quelle suprise, it turns out that when a parent actually wants a child and wants to raise them with the other parent they are a great parent to those children.

OP and her child live a far better life than OP could provide on her efforts because of the large child maintenance she has received every single month already and will continue to do so. She's no victim here.

The fact that three children in a stable, successful family unit live a different life ten years on to OP falling pregnant has very little to do with anything. It's not what her son is entitled to, because that set up was never on the cards for OP, kids or not.

This. I don’t get why posters think he didn’t want the baby. They were together for four years - not as though it was a one night stand.

OP says he walked out before his son was born, but people are assuming that that was when OP told him she was pregnant. The relationship could have broken down past the point where a termination was an option. And he was happy to have contact with the chid until OP objected to his new partner visiting the baby six weeks post partum.

The fact that he then pursued OP through the courts for the GF to have contact with the baby, and went NC when that failed is one of the most callous things l’ve ever heard, and yet other women on here appear to be supporting it. Women are regularly castigated on MN for letting a new partner anywhere near their child and yet what we seem to be saying here is that it’s perfectly acceptable for a man to do exactly that. And don’t get me started on the timescales between him walking out when OP was pregnant and having a new GF by the time the baby was born.

I think people have a very blinkered view of what actually happened because it doesn’t suit the narrative of OP being feckless and money grabbing. If the relationship broke down during her pregnancy and her ex had a new, and clearly serious relationship with another woman by the time the baby was born, it’s not an unreasonable leap to this woman being the reason he walked out. And if OP had her suspicions that he was cheating while she was pregnant she’s hardly likely to welcome her into her childs’ life with open arms.

People keep saying "his son , his son like it automatically results in a meaningful relationship.

This is a child he didn't want and has no bond with who now receives a phonecall a couple of times a month.

Just because OP did want the child doesn't suddenly mean anything changes for the other parent. Millions of women decide they don't want to have and raise a child they've conceived, every year. Should we all be judging them about the son they opted out of? I hope not.

It's ok not to want a pregnancy. It's ok not to want to raise a child with a particular person. For both parents.

It's ok as a woman to choose to have a baby. But if you choose it knowingly that you will be a single parent, then don't pretend life is unfair and you had no choice. Prepare yourself to answer the questions your child will have. Prepare yourself for the upset this child may feel as a result. Because you created the situation, so own it and be accountable for your decisions.

Why are you, and the rest of the thread assuming that he walked out because he didn’t want the baby ? OP hasn’t specified. It could have been for any number of reasons and past the time when abortion was an option.

What’s clear is that he left OP pregnant and by the time she had the baby he was in a serious relationship with someone else. OP didn’t want the new woman anywhere near their child - has it crossed anyone’s mind that it was possibly because she suspects he was cheating with her while OP was pregnant ? Snd that’s the reason he left ? He was happy to have contact when the baby was born but basically threw a strop when he couldn’t get his own way. I have no idea why people would support that.

I don’t get why posters think he didn’t want the baby. They were together for four years - not as though it was a one night stand.

OP says they were together for 4yrs. On the basis they didn't even live together after that amount of time, you have to wonder if he thought they were together in any real form.

He lived with, married and had multiple children with someone in a similar time span, so it's not like we're dealing with a commitment phobe.

As I said, I wonder what his summation of interactions over the 4yrs with OP would be? A relationship? Someone he slept with on and off? Friends with benefits? My sister's friend was obsessed with a chap locally and they would hook up most weekends, and this probably went on for 3 or 4 years. He was never properly interested in her and she turned a blind eye to any rumblings that he was dating other people too. But she was infatuated and always available for him. She didn't have eyes for anyone else. He met his now fiancé and had moved her into his within about 5 months. The friend was distraught how "her man" could do that to her. If you ask her, she will tell you they were in a relationship. It was to her.

From the way OP describes things and the very fact that someone who has no issue with settling down, progressed nothing with OP for 4 years, it points to it being a one sided perception of a relationship here too.

You need to calm the fuck down. You are way too personal. This is someone's real life you are frothing at, go get a cup of tea or something

He wanted to bring his new partner to meet the baby when he was 6 weeks old. The court decided it was too early (so she says) but I'm not so sure.

At that age the child would never not have known dads partner and she would have been there since he could remember. There would be no adjustment period or awkward introductions. She'd be part of his life almost from day 1.

They were hardly going to take the new baby away from her for extended period but just that dad's girlfriend was coming to some of the visits.

The OP didnt want his new partner to meet their baby so the consequences are he and his now wife aren't a part of the child's life.

Not having him around has hugely benefitted her financially because if he'd been in their lives the child would be staying overnight and the maintenance would be lower or nil if it was 50/50.

The OP has had the benefit of this money without ever having him around or negotiating contact. Most women would be overjoyed with that amount of money without having to deal with their ex. She's still not happy though.

You have any idea how many women would be happy, not having to give over their child, 50% of the time to a useless dad and getting all that maintenance.

I would be very careful of rocking the boat, given that if she demands more money and takes him to court for it, he might decide to formalise the child arrangements. He might suddenly look to want to see his child a lot more often and integrate him into his life. That might result in him, having some overnight's days, which would actually reduce maintenance rather than increase it.

In any event, she needs to sort herself out because when he's 18, this maintenance is going to end and she'd better have a game plan for supporting herself and getting a pension, because she's entitled to none of his money once her child is an adult. If the child goes to university, the dad will be paying the fees and the whole fees directly to his son not to his mother.

For some reason, she is unable to work more hours because she has one child who is nine. How does she think everybody else does it. The only person in this arrangement who doesn't think they should have to pay for their child is his mother.

It's easy to spot a real lawyer on here. They're the measured ones telling OP she won't likely get what she wants - that's because they know for real how hard it is in practice. Theory is one thing, but practice is quite another. Any lawyer knows that.

It's so funny all these people saying, I got a top up order so she should get one..Do you think lawyers have never had clients say to us "I know somebody who got it so why can't I." We hear that kind of thing every other week. The stock response to that is: just because you know somebody who got it doesn't mean you ll get it different circumstances different Judge, different everything.

The real lawyers arent the one's looking up top-op orders on Google thinking, just because they exist, they can get one for themselves. Lawyers don't do that. The actual lawyers are easily spotted by being measured and realistic as they are in their careers. They don't post sensational things telling people to drag them through court, to get much more money, and they'll definitely get it cause they knew someone who did.

If I was you I'd absolutely get all you can get. He's been a total deadbeat father to your son and why shouldn't you be able to take him on holidays and provide experiences for him when his dad earns that much money?!

I also totally understand why you're working part time, people who work FT are always bitter when someone works PT for their children's benefit.

Maintenance would not be nil if he had the child 50/50, it would still be a substantial amount but then the child would also be benefitting from his dad's money while at his house and probably going on holidays with them. I can't blame op for not wanting the new woman to meet the baby straight away, it was the dad who then had a strop and refused to see his son for years and still makes no effort.

Erm, I am calm thanks?

And yes this is someone's real life. That of a little boy, who's mother has made sole decisions that will affect how he grows up, and is already seeing the ramifications of that.

She'll go for more cash. It's her son that will feel the real cost.

I agree.

You don’t need more than what he’s giving you, unless there’s private schooling etc.

Honestly OP, that’s loads. My sister had £50 a week for hers.

So he's fine to abandon his son and we can just blame the woman for that? Would you abandon your child for the same reason he did?

The only relevant thing about the relationship is that it has a child.
The OP gets just under £300 a week for their DS.
The usual argument is that the NRP should be paying the same as the RP.
So the child in this case is having just under £600 p/w spent on him.
Ignoring housing which the OP would pay for anyway.
What realistically are the financial needs that are not being met?

I thought the same

The description that the judge agreed his wife wan not to be near the baby is misleading. The judge can't force OP to let anyone into her house. But that's not the same thing. So it was maybe agreed the wife couldn't attend her home. Dad then said, there's no genuine reason wife can't come, she's going to be as much of this child's life as I am from day 1.

OP simply didn't want her there out of jealousy. It wasn't to protect the child, or any child related reason. As you say, a 6 week old is oblivious. It's all about OP here.

Dad wasn't up for this nonsense. OP tried to backtrack then, realising that the swaying power and control she thought she'd automatically have as "I'm the mother of his child" was actually zero. If she truly thought the wife shouldn't be there, she wouldn't have back tracked at all. That's very telling.

If she goes for more money, whilst choosing not to work when she could, whilst it's already shown her child is more than provided for, already receiving maximum CMS, she's got little chance.

What she will do, even by applying, is piss off a man and his wife who've already shown their tolerance to this situation when OP starts making demands that she feels entitled too. A very fragile relationship with little bond exists between this child and the father, and I also think, going after more money is going to result in a "fuck you" response.

If there were more of a bond then it could be a "fuck you" he'll stay here more of the time and you'll get less maintenance. However, 6yrs of NC, 3yrs of seeing him once every 4mths or so for a few hours in amusement arcades. That's not a child that he wants to integrate at all. So it will most likely be "fuck you" don't contact us again. And they will let him know why when he undoubtedly comes angrily looking for answers as an adult.

God knows what she's going to do in 8yrs when it all stops anyway. If he loses his job next week, next year even, what's her plan then? That should be the the pressing concern. She relies on this to fund herself. Not to cover 50% of a 9yrs olds living expenses. It's funding her part time work status.

Yeah, see.It's a nice thing to believe that the mother would actually have welcomed her son going their fifty / fifty in being taken away on holidays. We all know that's probably not the case. Quite a high proportion of women, when there's a breakup, never want their child to see their father again. At this point, the baby was a few weeks old.He hadn't had a chance to prove himself either way.

She banned her ex-partner bringing his girlfriend to visit the baby. She wouldn't allow it even once, maybe if she had none of this would have happened.

I think she likes having all this money whilst not having to deal with her son going there. She gets the best of all worlds. Like it or not, that money has enabled her to only work part-time. Well, she better make a plan for the next 9 years.Because that will be on the horizon pretty quickly and she'll have to cope with that loss and income.It is never, ever a good life plan to rely on somebody else's money.And anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that.

Exactly.And although people don't believe those who say their lawyers, I actually am. Been a while since I did family law.
so I add that disclaimer.

It would be a very odd order indeed for a court to make that the dad's girlfriend or wife wasn't allowed near the baby, ever. I think you quite rightly say the judge probably ordered that she didn't have to allow her in her home. She has the absolute right to deny entry to anyone to her own home. But when the baby was 6 weeks olds, the dad could hardly take the baby away from mum to spend time with him and the girlfriend.

That completely frustrated any integration of her son to his father any new step mother, because she wouldn't allow the new stepmother near him. She had total control of the situation. The baby can't be taken away from her because he's too young and she got at her own way that he comes alone without his girlfriend. It backfired big time though.

So that meant his girlfriend was never allowed to see the baby.And he was perhaps uncomfortable, spending all this time alone with his ex and the baby without his girlfriend, now wife, there.

The baby was utterly oblivious, as you say, and I picked up on that. It wasn't trying to introduce a new partner to a three year old or a six year old. If she had wanted to encourage a relationship, she would have allowed occasional visit by the ex girlfriend and not gone to court over it.

There is now a very tentative relationship in place and she wants to jeopardize it again by demanding more money.

She's got it all her own way. Her child to herself his girlfriend out the picture kid barely knows his dad and regular maintenance.

It's meant to be money for the child, but she's using it.So she doesn't have to work.

I would think very, very hard before dragging him back to court to demand more money.

What did he abandon? OP always lived alone in her rental as she still does. He lived somewhere else. They had some kind of interaction for 4yrs. Perhaps they would describe that interaction very differently.

She falls pregnant. He doesn't want to be with her or raise a child with her. He ends their relationship/friends with benefits/weekend hook ups/who knows what the situation was. She decides to keep the pregnancy as a single woman without the father. Both have done nothing wrong. Both are entitled not to want a baby.

Where's the abandonment? OP assessed the situation and chose to become a single mother. That's her prerogative. She's not abandoned.

If OP chose she wasn't having the baby, would she have abandoned it? Of course not. But because she can choose to have it, suddenly the other party has abandoned her. Again, of course not.

She's not to blame for being abandoned because she wasn't. She is responsible for choosing to have a child without a present father when she equally could have chosen not too, but that's not right or wrong, that's just simply the choice she made.

I wouldn't have wanted a new woman visiting my baby either at 6 weeks old, do you not remember the post birth hormones? And if you think that's enough justification for him to completely abandon his child then that just shows what kind of immoral person you are.

I get it, of course.She was vulnerable and didn't want it thrown in her face that her ex never had a relationship with her but was quite happy to start a relationship with someone else.

Of course she shouldn't have had to have her in her home.

Any kind of compromise would be when the baby's older and you are able to take him out.He can see the girlfriend, but I don't want to see her.

it was a no, no no way, never and in that order. Then when he did go, she changed her mind and try to backtrack.